On 18/02/2021 14:30, Numan Siddique wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 7:37 PM Mark Gray <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Numan, some suggestions below!
> 
> Hi Mark G,
> 
> Thanks for the review.
> 
> PSB for a few comments.
> 
>>
>> On 09/02/2021 18:44, [email protected] wrote:
>>> From: Numan Siddique <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> When a Gateway router is configured with a load balancer
>>> and it is also configured with options:lb_force_snat_ip=<IP>,
>>> OVN after load balancing the destination IP to one of the
>>> backend also does a NAT on the source ip with the
>>> lb_force_snat_ip if the packet is destined to a load balancer
>>> VIP.
>>>
>>> There is a problem with the snat of source ip to 'lb_force_snat_ip'
>>> in one particular usecase.  When the packet enters the Gateway router
>>> from a provider logical switch destined to the load balancer VIP,
>>> then it is first load balanced to one of the backend and then
>>> the source ip is snatted to 'lb_force_snat_ip'.  If the chosen
>>> backend is reachable via the provider logical switch, then the
>>> packet is hairpinned back and it may hit the wire with
>>> the source ip 'lb_force_snat_ip'.  If 'lb_force_snat_ip' happens
>>> to be an OVN internal IP then the packet may be dropped.
>>>
>>> This patch addresses this issue by providing the option to
>>> set the option - 'lb_force_snat_ip=router_ip'.  If 'router_ip'
>>> is set, then OVN will snat the load balanced packet to the
>>> router ip of the logical router port which chosen as 'outport'
>>> in lr_in_ip_routing stage.
>>
>> It almost feels like this should be the default behaviour?
> 
> 
> Can you please elaborate more ? You mean ideally CMS should set
> - router_ip ?

I was thinking that it could just be lb_force_snat_ip=true (default to
remote_ip)?
> 
> 
>>>
>>> Example.
>>>
>>> If the gateway router is
>>>
>>> ovn-nbctl show lr0
>>> router 68f20092-5563-44b8-9ccb-b11de3e3a66c (lr0)
>>>     port lr0-sw0
>>>         mac: "00:00:00:00:ff:01"
>>>         networks: ["10.0.0.1/24"]
>>>     port lr0-public
>>>         mac: "00:00:20:20:12:13"
>>>         networks: ["172.168.0.100/24"]
>>>
>>> Then the below logical flows are added if 'lb_force_snat_ip'
>>> is configured to 'router_ip'.
>>>
>>> table=1 (lr_out_snat), priority=110
>>>    match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-public"),
>>>    action=(ct_snat(172.168.0.100);)
>>>
>>> table=1 (lr_out_snat), priority=110
>>>    match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-sw0")
>>>    action=(ct_snat(10.0.0.1);)
>>>
>>> For the above described scenario, the packet will have source ip as
>>> 172.168.0.100 which belongs to the provider logical switch CIDR.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Tim Rozet <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Numan Siddique <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>  northd/ovn-northd.8.xml | 35 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>  northd/ovn-northd.c     | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>  tests/ovn-northd.at     | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  3 files changed, 177 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>>> index 70065a36d9..27b28aff93 100644
>>> --- a/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>>> +++ b/northd/ovn-northd.8.xml
>>
>> Should 'ovn-nb.xml' also be updated?
> 
> Great catch. I totally missed it.
> 
>>
>>> @@ -3653,6 +3653,32 @@ nd_ns {
>>>            <code>flags.force_snat_for_dnat == 1 &amp;&amp; ip</code> with an
>>>            action <code>ct_snat(<var>B</var>);</code>.
>>>          </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>> +
>>> +      <li>
>>> +        <p>
>>> +          If the Gateway router in the OVN Northbound database has been
>>> +          configured to force SNAT a packet (that has been previously
>>> +          load-balanced) using router IP (i.e <ref column="options"
>>> +          table="Logical_Router"/>:lb_force_snat_ip=router_ip), then for
>>> +          each logical router port <var>P</var> attached to the Gateway
>>> +          router, a priority-110 flow matches
>>> +          <code>flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 &amp;&amp; outport == 
>>> <var>P</var>
>>> +          </code> with an action <code>ct_snat(<var>R</var>);</code>
>>> +          where <var>R</var> is the router port IP configured.
>>
>> maybe rephrase to "is the IP configured on the router port."
> 
> Ack. done
> 
>>
>>> +          If <code>R</code> is an IPv4 address then the match will also
>>> +          include <code>ip4</code> and if it is an IPv6 address, then the
>>> +          match will also include <code>ip6</code>.
>>> +        </p>
>>> +
>>> +        <p>
>>> +          If the logical router port <var>P</var> is configured with 
>>> multiple
>>> +          IPv4 and multiple IPv6 addresses, only the first IPv4 and first 
>>> IPv6
>>> +          address is considered.
>>
>> Should we log this condition?
> 
> Ack. I have added the log for this in v2.
> 
> 
>>
>>> +        </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>> +
>>> +      <li>
>>>          <p>
>>>            If the Gateway router in the OVN Northbound database has been
>>>            configured to force SNAT a packet (that has been previously
>>> @@ -3660,6 +3686,9 @@ nd_ns {
>>>            <code>flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 &amp;&amp; ip</code> with an
>>>            action <code>ct_snat(<var>B</var>);</code>.
>>>          </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>> +
>>> +      <li>
>>>          <p>
>>>            For each configuration in the OVN Northbound database, that asks
>>>            to change the source IP address of a packet from an IP address of
>>> @@ -3673,14 +3702,18 @@ nd_ns {
>>>            options, then the action would be <code>ip4/6.src=
>>>            (<var>B</var>)</code>.
>>>          </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>>
>>> +      <li>
>>>          <p>
>>>            If the NAT rule has <code>allowed_ext_ips</code> configured, then
>>>            there is an additional match <code>ip4.dst == 
>>> <var>allowed_ext_ips
>>>            </var></code>. Similarly, for IPV6, match would be <code>ip6.dst 
>>> ==
>>>            <var>allowed_ext_ips</var></code>.
>>>          </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>>
>>> +      <li>
>>>          <p>
>>>            If the NAT rule has <code>exempted_ext_ips</code> set, then
>>>            there is an additional flow configured at the priority + 1 of
>>> @@ -3689,7 +3722,9 @@ nd_ns {
>>>            </code>. This flow is used to bypass the ct_snat action for a 
>>> packet
>>>            which is destinted to <code>exempted_ext_ips</code>.
>>>          </p>
>>> +      </li>
>>>
>>> +      <li>
>>>          <p>
>>>            A priority-0 logical flow with match <code>1</code> has actions
>>>            <code>next;</code>.
>>> diff --git a/northd/ovn-northd.c b/northd/ovn-northd.c
>>> index db6572a62b..ece158b71e 100644
>>> --- a/northd/ovn-northd.c
>>> +++ b/northd/ovn-northd.c
>>> @@ -622,6 +622,7 @@ struct ovn_datapath {
>>>
>>>      struct lport_addresses dnat_force_snat_addrs;
>>>      struct lport_addresses lb_force_snat_addrs;
>>> +    bool lb_force_snat_router_ip;
>>>
>>>      struct ovn_port **localnet_ports;
>>>      size_t n_localnet_ports;
>>> @@ -721,6 +722,17 @@ init_nat_entries(struct ovn_datapath *od)
>>>              snat_ip_add(od, od->lb_force_snat_addrs.ipv6_addrs[0].addr_s,
>>>                          NULL);
>>>          }
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        const char *lb_force_snat =
>>> +            smap_get(&od->nbr->options, "lb_force_snat_ip");
>>> +        if (lb_force_snat && !strcmp(lb_force_snat, "router_ip")
>>> +                && smap_get(&od->nbr->options, "chassis")) {
>>> +            /* Set it to true only if its gateway router and
>>> +             * options:lb_force_snat_ip=router_ip. */
>>> +            od->lb_force_snat_router_ip = true;
>>> +        } else {
>>> +            od->lb_force_snat_router_ip = false;
>>> +        }
>>>      }
>>>
>>>      if (!od->nbr->n_nat) {
>>> @@ -8365,9 +8377,12 @@ get_force_snat_ip(struct ovn_datapath *od, const 
>>> char *key_type,
>>>      }
>>>
>>>      if (!extract_ip_address(addresses, laddrs)) {
>>> -        static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(5, 1);
>>> -        VLOG_WARN_RL(&rl, "bad ip %s in options of router "UUID_FMT"",
>>> -                     addresses, UUID_ARGS(&od->key));
>>> +        if (strcmp(addresses, "router_ip") || strcmp(key_type, "lb")) {
>>
>> Also, probably good to check or assert 'key_type' for NULL even though,
>> currently, all callers of get_force_snat_ip() cant pass a NULL value.
> 
> In v2, (which I'll submit now), I'm not modifying this function at all.
> 
> Also if "key_type' is NULL, then the code above this , which is
> ----
> char *key = xasprintf("%s_force_snat_ip", key_type);
> const char *addresses = smap_get(&od->nbr->options, key);
> -----
> 'addresses' will be NULL and hence we will not hit this condition.
> 
> 
>>> +            static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(5, 1);
>>> +            VLOG_WARN_RL(&rl, "bad ip %s in options of router "UUID_FMT"",
>>> +                         addresses, UUID_ARGS(&od->key));
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>>          return false;
>>
>> I think finding an IP or 'router_ip' should be the successful case and
>> not finding them should be unsuccessful. However, this would change the
>> logic for callers. Or maybe the name of this function could change and
>> another function to check for router_ip could be added. What do you think?
> 
> Ok. I get your point. My only reason to modify the function -
> get_force_snat_ip()
> was not to not log a warning if 'router_ip' is set. Ideally this
> function should be called
> if the option is a set of IP address(es).
> 
> So in v2, I've not modified this function. But instead I first check
> if lb_force_snat_ip
> is configured with 'router_ip' or not. I felt there is probably no
> need for a function just
> for that.
> 
>>
>>>      }
>>>
>>> @@ -8943,6 +8958,48 @@ build_lrouter_force_snat_flows(struct hmap *lflows, 
>>> struct ovn_datapath *od,
>>>      ds_destroy(&actions);
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +static void
>>> +build_lrouter_force_snat_flows_op(struct ovn_port *op,
>>> +                                  struct hmap *lflows,
>>> +                                  struct ds *match, struct ds *actions)
>>> +{
>>> +    if (!op->nbrp || !op->peer || !op->od->lb_force_snat_router_ip) {
>>> +        return;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    if (op->lrp_networks.n_ipv4_addrs) {
>>> +        ds_clear(match);
>>> +        ds_clear(actions);
>>> +
>>> +        /* Higher priority rules to force SNAT with the router port ip.
>>> +         * This only takes effect when the packet has already been
>>> +         * load balanced once. */
>>> +        ds_put_format(match, "flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && "
>>> +                      "outport == %s", op->json_key);
>>> +        ds_put_format(actions, "ct_snat(%s);",
>>> +                      op->lrp_networks.ipv4_addrs[0].addr_s);
>>> +        ovn_lflow_add(lflows, op->od, S_ROUTER_OUT_SNAT, 110,
>>
>> General musing that doesn't need to be addressed here. I wonder should
>> we have a macro definition for priorities for logical flows?
> 
> I'm not too sure. I think we could. But we will end up with lots of macros.
> 
> Please check out the v2.
> 
> Thanks
> Numan
> 
>>
>>> +                      ds_cstr(match), ds_cstr(actions));
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    /* op->lrp_networks.ipv6_addrs will always have LLA and that will be
>>> +     * last in the list. So add the flows only if n_ipv6_addrs > 1. */
>>> +    if (op->lrp_networks.n_ipv6_addrs > 1) {
>>> +        ds_clear(match);
>>> +        ds_clear(actions);
>>> +
>>> +        /* Higher priority rules to force SNAT with the router port ip.
>>> +         * This only takes effect when the packet has already been
>>> +         * load balanced once. */
>>> +        ds_put_format(match, "flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip6 && "
>>> +                      "outport == %s", op->json_key);
>>> +        ds_put_format(actions, "ct_snat(%s);",
>>> +                      op->lrp_networks.ipv6_addrs[0].addr_s);
>>> +        ovn_lflow_add(lflows, op->od, S_ROUTER_OUT_SNAT, 110,
>>> +                      ds_cstr(match), ds_cstr(actions));
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static void
>>>  build_lrouter_bfd_flows(struct hmap *lflows, struct ovn_port *op)
>>>  {
>>> @@ -11278,6 +11335,7 @@ build_lrouter_nat_defrag_and_lb(struct ovn_datapath 
>>> *od,
>>>                          "dnat");
>>>                  }
>>>              }
>>> +
>>>              if (lb_force_snat_ip) {
>>>                  if (od->lb_force_snat_addrs.n_ipv4_addrs) {
>>>                      build_lrouter_force_snat_flows(lflows, od, "4",
>>> @@ -11490,6 +11548,8 @@ build_lswitch_and_lrouter_iterate_by_op(struct 
>>> ovn_port *op,
>>>                                              &lsi->match, &lsi->actions);
>>>      build_lrouter_ipv4_ip_input(op, lsi->lflows,
>>>                                  &lsi->match, &lsi->actions);
>>> +    build_lrouter_force_snat_flows_op(op, lsi->lflows, &lsi->match,
>>> +                                      &lsi->actions);
>>>  }
>>>
>>>  static void
>>> diff --git a/tests/ovn-northd.at b/tests/ovn-northd.at
>>> index 7240e22baf..fd03b1fb66 100644
>>> --- a/tests/ovn-northd.at
>>> +++ b/tests/ovn-northd.at
>>> @@ -2443,3 +2443,82 @@ check ovn-sbctl set chassis hv1 
>>> other_config:port-up-notif=true
>>>  wait_row_count nb:Logical_Switch_Port 1 up=false name=lsp1
>>>
>>>  AT_CLEANUP
>>> +
>>> +AT_SETUP([ovn -- lb_force_snat_ip for Gateway Routers])
>>> +ovn_start
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl ls-add sw0
>>> +check ovn-nbctl ls-add sw1
>>> +
>>> +# Create a logical router and attach both logical switches
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lr-add lr0
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lrp-add lr0 lr0-sw0 00:00:00:00:ff:01 10.0.0.1/24
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-add sw0 sw0-lr0
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-type sw0-lr0 router
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-addresses sw0-lr0 00:00:00:00:ff:01
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-options sw0-lr0 router-port=lr0-sw0
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lrp-add lr0 lr0-sw1 00:00:00:00:ff:02 20.0.0.1/24
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-add sw1 sw1-lr0
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-type sw1-lr0 router
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-addresses sw1-lr0 00:00:00:00:ff:02
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-options sw1-lr0 router-port=lr0-sw1
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl ls-add public
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lrp-add lr0 lr0-public 00:00:20:20:12:13 172.168.0.100/24
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-add public public-lr0
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-type public-lr0 router
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-addresses public-lr0 router
>>> +check ovn-nbctl lsp-set-options public-lr0 router-port=lr0-public
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl set logical_router lr0 options:chassis=ch1
>>> +
>>> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows lr0 > lr0flows
>>> +AT_CAPTURE_FILE([lr0flows])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CHECK([grep "lr_out_snat" lr0flows | grep force_snat_for_lb | sort], 
>>> [0], [dnl
>>> +])
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb set logical_router lr0 
>>> options:lb_force_snat_ip="20.0.0.4 aef0::4"
>>> +
>>> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows lr0 > lr0flows
>>> +AT_CAPTURE_FILE([lr0flows])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CHECK([grep "lr_out_snat" lr0flows | grep force_snat_for_lb | sort], 
>>> [0], [dnl
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=100  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4), action=(ct_snat(20.0.0.4);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=100  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip6), action=(ct_snat(aef0::4);)
>>> +])
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb set logical_router lr0 
>>> options:lb_force_snat_ip="router_ip"
>>> +
>>> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows lr0 > lr0flows
>>> +AT_CAPTURE_FILE([lr0flows])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CHECK([grep "lr_out_snat" lr0flows | grep force_snat_for_lb | sort], 
>>> [0], [dnl
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-public"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(172.168.0.100);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-sw0"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(10.0.0.1);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-sw1"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(20.0.0.1);)
>>> +])
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb remove logical_router lr0 options chassis
>>> +
>>> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows lr0 > lr0flows
>>> +AT_CAPTURE_FILE([lr0flows])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CHECK([grep "lr_out_snat" lr0flows | grep force_snat_for_lb | sort], 
>>> [0], [dnl
>>> +])
>>> +
>>> +check ovn-nbctl set logical_router lr0 options:chassis=ch1
>>> +check ovn-nbctl --wait=sb add logical_router_port lr0-sw1 networks 
>>> "bef0\:\:1/64"
>>> +
>>> +ovn-sbctl dump-flows lr0 > lr0flows
>>> +AT_CAPTURE_FILE([lr0flows])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CHECK([grep "lr_out_snat" lr0flows | grep force_snat_for_lb | sort], 
>>> [0], [dnl
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-public"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(172.168.0.100);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-sw0"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(10.0.0.1);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip4 && outport == "lr0-sw1"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(20.0.0.1);)
>>> +  table=1 (lr_out_snat        ), priority=110  , 
>>> match=(flags.force_snat_for_lb == 1 && ip6 && outport == "lr0-sw1"), 
>>> action=(ct_snat(bef0::1);)
>>> +])
>>> +
>>> +AT_CLEANUP
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
>>
> 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to